the law of obligations - roman foundations of the civilian tradition

The Law of Obligations Roman Foundations of the Civilian Tradition

REINHARD ZIMMERMANN Dr. iur (Hamburg)

Professor fur Privatrecht, Romisches Recht und Historische Rechtsvergleichung, Vniversitat Regensburg; formerly W.P. Schreiner Professor of Roman

and Comparative Law, University of Cape Town

Juta & Co, Ltd CAPE TOWN WETTON JOHANNESBURG

Created with novaPDF Printer (www.novaPDF.com)

First Edition 1990 Reprinted 1992

Juta & Co, Ltd PO Box 14373, Kenwyn 7790

This book is copyright under the Berne Convention. In terms of the Copyright Act, No 98 of 1978, no part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Publisher.

ISBN 0 7021 2347 1

SET, PRINTED AND HOUND IN THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA BY THE RUSTICA PRESS (PTY) LTD, NDABENI, CAPE

D1638


[N]ihil es[t] homine nobili dignius quam cognitio[ . . .] juris. Primum quidem ejus quod omnes homines hominibus, et gentes gentibus sociat; deinde vero patri[i], cujus partem non exiguam facit jus Romanum a plerisque populis adoptatum, per se quoque supra omnia Civitatum jura dignissimum nosci, ut quod perfectum excultumque sit experi-mentis tam magni tamque diuturni Imperii. . . . Tarn evidens . . . est ejus Juris in plerisque partibus, iis maxime, quae ad contractus aut damnum injuria datum pertinent, aequitas, ut, ad quos populos Romana arma pertingere nunquam potuerunt, . . . eo leges Romanae sine vi ulla, justitiae suae vi triumphantes, pervenerint.

Hugo Grotius, Epistolae ad Gallos, CLVI (Hamburgi, XVI. Novemb. 1633)

(There is nothing more worthy of a gentleman than the study of Law: in the first place the study of that law which links man to man and nation to nation; then the study of the law of our fatherland. No small part of this consists in the Roman law, adopted by most peoples, but in itself also the most worthy of study, above all national laws, for having been developed and perfected by the experiences of so great and longlived an empire. So apparent is the equity of that law in its several parts, but especially in those which pertain to contract and unlawful damage, that it prevails even among those peoples whom the Romans could never conquer by arms, and it does so without any force, triumphing merely by virtue of its innate justice.)


Preface i. The story is told of a professor who was asked, at short notice, to deliver a lecture. How much time would he need for preparation? That depended entirely on how long he was supposed to talk, the professor answered. A two-hour lecture he could give off the cuff, but for a presentation of 10 or 20 minutes he would need much longer.

In the light of this anecdote, I should like to assure the reader that, despite appearances, this book is rather short. Considering the time-span and the subject-matter which it sets out to cover within a mere 1241 pages, the treatment may even be considered to be alarmingly short. On much more specific topics such as, for example, contractual liability in Roman law, there are a whole variety of modern monographs running into several hundred pages each; for many specific contracts there is a specialized literature that is abundantly rich; and even to individual facets of a contract, such as liability for latent defects in the Roman law of sale, not only comprehensive articles but entire books have been devoted. Apart from that, there is the literature written by countless generations of lawyers since the days of the glo.ssators, who have, again and again, worked their way through the Roman texts; and, finally, there are all those who have written not so much on the rules of Roman law as such as on the history of their reception, further refinement and generalization, on how they have been reinterpreted, misunderstood or used to promote entirely new policies. Innumerable individual topics (the concepts of interesseor damages, of error in substantia, or of dolus, the error requirement in the condictio indebiti, the notion of iniuria in terms of the actio iniuriarum or of the lex Aquilia, the doctrine of causaor of its English equivalent: considerationor the medieval theories surround-ing the notion of usury, to mention just a few) constitute what the medieval lawyers were wont to describe as a shoreless ocean onto which no one was able to venture without running a grave risk of drowning. The present book is therefore based, chapter for chapter, on a process of selection, on an attempt to sift, to compress and to put into shape an abundant body of material. Which criteria have governed this process of selection?

Here I must say a few words about the aims that I have pursued in writing this book. Essentially, it is, of course, a book on Roman law and the question thus arises why it should be important to deal with a subject that appears to be so far removed from our time. Many different answers may be given to this question, and one can approach a discussion of the "relevance" of Roman law, quite legitimately, from a variety of entirely different perspectives. To me, two points have

vii


viii Preface

always been of particular importancetwo points with regard to which Roman law differs significantly from any other historical legal system. On the one hand, it constitutes, in its ensemble, such a high level of cultural achievement that it will always retain its character as a model for the rational solution of legal conflicts. The problems raised, the arguments advanced and the solutions found by the Roman lawyers have in many instances, over the centuries, maintained both their topicality and their educational value. In other words: by analysing a crisp opinion given by Cclsus or Ulpian, one can frequently learn more about legal ingenuity than by wading through the elaborate treatises of many modern law professors.

On the other hand, however, and more importantly, our way of thinking about law (in the present context, more specifically about the law of obligations) has been decisively moulded by the Roman lawyers. The contract-delict dichotomy; unjustified enrichment as an indepen-dent source of liability; the concept of a consensual contract; or even the basic notion of an obligation: these are only some of the fundamental ingredients which have shaped the civilian tradition. Many individual legal institutions have been preserved, cither entirely unchanged or in a modernized form; and many rules of Roman law, in some or other codified version, still determine, for better or worse, the outcome of legal disputes at the end of the 20th century. Even where a new regime prevails, it has usually been introduced consciously or unconsciously in opposition to a rule of Roman law; and even in those cases, it is often only on the basis of a proper understanding of the Roman rule in question that one is able to appreciate, evaluate and understand the development. Even in defeat, Roman law therefore retains a key function for any more than superficial comprehension of the modern law. And apart from that, such defeats have occasionally not been of a lasting character. The idea that a codification should be able to sever all ties with the past, and thus entirely cut off the continuity of historical development, has proved to be a rather simplistic illusion. Even in a codified legal system the reappearance of ideas and solutions from the treasure house of the ius commune is by no means a rarethough usually an unacknowledgedphenomenon. The contents of that treasure house, however, are largely of Roman provenance.

Underlying both the form and content of the present book is therefore the belief that for a proper understanding of modern law one needs to know about the origin of its rules and institutions: why and how they have been developed, in which form they have been received, why and how they have been retained, changed, adapted or rejected. I have therefore always regretted the prevailing division of legal literature into books devoted to Roman law "proper" and to the modern history of private law. The study ot legal history tends to become a rather sapless, purely "academic" affair, and is in danger of losing much of its legitimacy as an essential part of an educated lawyer's


Preface IX

intellectual equipment if one omits to ask what a particular idea has contributed to the development of modern institutions. Roman law has made a particularly significant contribution, and the modern lawyer may thus legitimately expect a professor of Roman law to describe and analyse the details of this impact. Or, to put the matter slightly more pointedly: suretyship transactions in Babylonian law are a matter for the specialist; "alterum non laedere", "ex nudo consensu oritur actio" or "neminem ex alterius detrimento locupletiorem tacerc", on the other hand, do not concern only the professional legal historian, but every modern lawyer.

II. One further point must immediately be added. Roman law does not only form the historical basis of only one particular, national legal system; it provides the most essential foundations of the "civilian" tradition. The term "civilian", in the terminology of English comparatists, refers to the legal systems on the European continent. It is used in contrast to the (English) common law. This distinction is very valuable in one respect; however, one has to beware of two different kinds of misconception.

On the one hand, it emphasizes correctly the basic unity of the European legal tradition; for the modern division of the science of law into national legal disciplines is of comparatively recent origin. From the late Middle Ages until the time of the French Revolution, the countries of Western and Central Europe had a common law and a common legal science. The creation of this IUS commune was part of a most dramatic and far-reaching civilizatory phenomenon: the so-called Renaissance of the 12th century. Both the Roman Church and the Roman Empire (of the German nation) claimed to be supreme and universal authorities, and they needed rational legal systems as a source of legitimacy and as a means of control and organization. Thus, the new scholastic method of analysing and synthesizing was applied to the authoritative texts: the canones, on the one hand, and the recently rediscovered Justinianic law as compiled in what came to be known as the Corpus Juris Civilis, on the other. Roman law thus became one of the two principal ingredients of the medieval ius utrumquc; but its counterpart, the canon law, was heavily influenced by it as well {"Ecclesia vivit lege Romana"). It was this ius utrumque which was taught at the universities and which the graduates, first of Bologna, then of all the other law schools that spread over Europe, tended to apply when they moved into key positions in the administration ot their various kingdoms, principalities and cities. Large parts of Roman law therefore came to be "usu rcceptum" and constituted the basis of a European Roman-canon "common" law. This development tied in well, if not with a political concept of a Roman continuity (the doctrine


x Preface

of a transiatio imperii from the Roman principes to Charlemagne and his successors), then with the general cultural Rome-ideal of the Middle Ages. Eventually Roman law came to be regarded as the embodiment of both ratio and aequitas. Local laws and older territorial customs were to some extent inserted into, absorbed by and amalgamated with the ius commune.

It is particularly important to emphasize the European character of these developments. True, Roman law was not received at the same time in all places. The movement started in Italy in the 12th century, it reached the northern part of France and Holland in the 13th and 14th centuries and in Germany it was only in the 16th century that Roman law succeeded in establishing itself as the ius commune. Also, in the course of time different countries took the lead as far as further refinement of academic study or practical application of Roman law was concerned. But the general pattern of the development was essentially the same everywhere. In the Middle Ages, the whole of educated Europe formed a single and undifferentiated cultural unit; and the Roman-canon "common" law was part and parcel of this European culture. Law professors moved freely from a chair in one country to one in another; the same textbooks were used at Pavia or Bologna as much as at Halle, Alcala or Oxford; and it was on a European level, too, that all the major transformations of that common law took place. Moving with the same cultural tides and moored to a common language, European legal science remained an essentially homogeneous intellectual world. It was the international communis opinio doctorum that became authoritative for the application and development of the law. Thus, what we usually refer to as usus modernus pandectarum existed not only in Germany, but in the whole of Central and Western Europe.

It is this tradition to which the word "civilian" is usually applied and to which Roman law has made a major contribution; and it is one of the concerns of the present book to revive the interest of the modern lawyer in that contribution, to bring to his mind the extent of our indebtedness to Roman legal science, and thus to enhance his appreciation of its achievements. This is not only an exercise in antiquarianism. For the civilian tradition lives on, albeit often unrecognized, in the modern national legal systems. All the major European codes find their roots at one stage or another in the development of the ius commune which they were designed to supplant; and the ius commune therefore usually presents the most appropriate starting point for comparative research in the traditional core areas of continental private law. Apart from that, however, it provides the intellectual and doctrinal framework within which a new European legal unity may one day emerge. Anyone attempting to bolster the move towards greater political and economic unity by a harmonization of the legal rules applying in the various European


Preface xi

countries would neglect their common historical basis at his peril. The ms commune even today constitutes a unifying force ot great potential. On the other hand (and here we come to the two more problematic features of the terminological distinction referred to above), the "European" ius commune and the "English" common law were (and are) not really so radically distinct as is often suggested. This applies to the methodological approach and framework within which the law developed as much as to the substantive legal rules. Thus, firstly, the continental ius commune of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries displayed many features that we like to regard today as typically English. For it was not a professorial law characterized by impractical abstractions, deductive reasoning and conceptual jurisprudence; to a large extent, it was judicial law, juhsprudentia forensis, developing through lawyers' interpretations and judicial opinions, creating a continuous literary legal tradition and leading towards an authoritative communis opmio. It was thus, incidentally, not very different in spirit from classical Roman law. And secondly: England in reality was never completely cut off from continental legal culture. Indeed, in its very inception, the common law, which became a hallmark of English life, was not English at all. It was "a species ot continental feudal law developed into an English legal system by kings and justices of continental extraction" (Maitland). Throughout the centuries, Roman (civil) law never ceased, through various channels, to exercise a considerable influence on English law and jurisprudence. This does not mean that the common law can be described merely as an otfshoot of either Roman law or canon law. Of course, a whole variety of indigenous threads were woven into its tapestry; and even where there was some civilian influence, English courts and writers have often proceeded to develop the law along different lines than their continental counterparts. But it would appear to be a fruitful exercise to try to explore a common basis for comparative legal studies, to trace explicit as well as cryptic reception processes, to concentrate one's attention, for once, not so much on the distance and the differences between common law and civil law as on their proximity and similarities; and to attempt a comparison of legal solutions against the background of a common "Western" civilization. It is tor this reason that I have included, wherever appropriate, references to the English common law.

III. The present book is based on seven years' experience of teaching Roman law at the University ot Cape Town. I have tried to write the type of book that I would have liked my students to have; or, which is essentially the same, the type of book that 1 would have enjoyed to read when I studied for my law degree at the University of Hamburg. I do not think that Roman law can adequately be presented in terms of


xii Preface

abstract propositions. It has been developed, largely, in a casuistic fashion, and as soon as one neglects this vital feature, the study of Roman law tends to become a rather flat and uninteresting affair. In contradistinction to many other books on Roman law, I have therefore always attempted to start with the concrete and specific and to proceed from there to topics and propositions of a more general nature. (Chapters 1 and 27, however, constitute certain unavoidable exceptions to this manner of presentation.) Also, the emphasis throughout my book falls squarely on the individual cases discussed by the Roman jurists. Of course, I have tried to select those which have played a key role in the development of a specific legal rule or institution within the history of Roman law or of the later ius commune, or which are characteristic of the way in which the Roman jurists thought or argued. I have also tried to add colour to the discussion by providing the kind of background information which I believe one needs in order to evaluate the sources in their historical setting.

It is obvious that one cannot, under these circumstances, aim at encyclopedic completeness. The present book is therefore not in the nature of a comprehensive reference work which would meticulously list and soberly, if somewhat tediously, describe all conceivable particulars of the Roman law of obligations. I have rather chosen what I consider to be its most characteristic and important facets and tried to deal with them more thoroughly than would otherwise have been possible. The selection, again, has largely been detcrminded by the contribution which a specific legal institution has made to the modern law of obligations. Thus, to mention one example, discussion of the contract littens has been reduced to a mere footnote. But not only topics which are of purely historical interest have been largely neglected; the ancient history of the Roman law of obligations, too, features only as far as this is absolutely necessary in order to appreciate the position in classical Roman law. And the problems connected with determining whether or not a particular text is interpolated have been highlighted only once by way of example. Essentially, then, I have attempted to tell the story of the characteristic concepts and institutions of the Roman law of obligations, commencing with what we usually refer to as classical Roman law but carrying it, beyond Justinian, into the modern law.

As far as this extension of the story into the ius commune is concerned, I had to confine myself even more drastically. Generally speaking, I have only been able to emphazise certain episodes within the history of the ius commune which have been of particular importance for the process of adaptation, transformation and modernization of the Roman law. The contributions of the canon lawyers, of the Roman-Dutch jurists and of the usus modcrnus pandectarum feature particularly prominently in this respect. Among the modern legal systems into which the story could have been carried, I have selected


Preface xiii

German, South African and English law. The references to modern French law are too haphazard to deserve to be m entioned in this context. W hy just the legal systems of these three countries? The cynic may be inclined to say that they happen to be the ones with which the author is most familiar. And in a way, of course, the cynic is right. Nevertheless, I do not think that the choice is unjustifiable from a more ob jective poin t o f v iew . T he G erm an B GB is one of the m ajor European codifications, and it is based, for better or for worse, more purely on Rom an legal learning than any of the others. Un like , especially, the French and Austrian codifications, it has absorbed the results of pandectist legal science, that last, scintillating blossom on the tree of the ius commune. The choice of English law has already been explained. South African private law, in turn, constitutes one of the last preserves in the modern world where the tradition of the ius commune still lives on , un tram m elled, largely , by the in terven tion o f the legislator. Courts and legal writers still derive their inspiration directly from the sources of (classical) Rom an-Dutch law, and through them , from Justinian's Corpus Juris C ivilis. Moreover, South African law is also of particular interest to the modern comparative lawyer since it is one ot only a handful of "mixed jurisdictions"of legal system s, that is, which are not only based on traditional civilian learning, but which have also absorbed much English law. This reception of English legal ideas occurred in the course o f the 19 th cen tu ry and by a p rocess that reveals certain in tr igu ing sim ilarities to the spread ot Rom an law over Europe. Thus, the two m ain em anations of the "W estern", o r E urop e an ( in the b ro a de r se n se) , tr ad i t io n h av e h ere b e en blended together, and the processes of a mutual assimilation that have occurred over the years offer stimulating insights as well as valuable experiences for anyone interested in the prospect ot a future European com mon law.

I should perhaps stress that the present book deals specifically with the Roman roots of the civilian tradition. Thus, it confines itself to the traditional core areas of the law of obligations; it does not discuss the emergence of those of its more modern branches, which derive their origin from other sources. The book is therefore not a textbook of the ius commune. Also, its subject matter is purely the substantive private law. More specifically, therefore, the law of procedure has not been dealt with, at least not as far as the ius comm une or modern legal systems are concerned. Classical Roman law, on the other hand, cannot be understood excep t from a p rocedural perspective , and th is procedural perspective thus often influences the discussion. But here, again, the Roman law of civil procedure is not explained as such; a basic knowledge of its characteristic features is taken for granted.

Thirty out of the 32 chapters were written during the seven years I spent at the University of Cape Town. I have thus been able to draw on certain sources (South African monographs, dissertations and, m


xiv Preface

particular, court decisions) which are not readily available in European libraries. On the other hand, however, it was often exceedingly difficult to obtain more specialized European works, particularly modern Italian monographs and law reviews. I have, intermittently, been able to spend some time in Hamburg working in the library of the seminar for Roman law and comparative legal history; in a few urgent cases German colleagues have also helped by sending me photocopies. Although this considerably facilitated my task, there remain certain works which I have, unfortunately, not been able to consult, since even the inter-library loan services failed to locate them. I have sifted through and, where appropriate, included in the footnotes all the literature that was available to me by the end of 1988; in some instances it was also still possible to incorporate relevant contributions which appeared in 1989. This does not, regrettably, apply to vol. II of Helmut Coing's magisterial treatise Europa'isches Privatredit, nor to the third edition of Farlam and Hathaway, Contract, Cases, Materials, Commentary (by G. Lubbe and Chr. Murray). Generally, references in the footnotes to older literature on Roman law have been confined to works which I regard as specifically significant. From them, the reader will always be able to trace further secondary sources. Apart from that he can, of course, as far as the literature up to 1975 is concerned, always consult the two volumes of Max Kaser's Rotnisches Prii'atrecht. I have not deemed it necessary to try to emulate the bibliographic comprehen-siveness of these standard works which must, surely, be available to whoever wishes to embark on specialized research in Roman law. Only the more recent literature, which would otherwise be difficult to trace, has been referred to more comprehensively. Furthermore, since one common denominator of all future readers of this book will be their command of English, I have also endeavoured to draw their attention to all the secondary literature in that language that was available to me and that was not too outdated.

IV. A foreword not only confronts an author with the slightly awkward task of explaining why he has set out to write his book, ofjustifying the approach he has adopted, and of preparing the reader, as gently as possible, for the arduous task that lies ahead. It also provides the welcome opportunity of thanking all those persons who and institutions which have made a special contribution towards its existence.

First of all, it must be obvious to every reader how much the present book owes, where it deals with classical Roman law, to the work of Max Kaser. His three great handbooks, in particular, have shaped my way of thinking on Roman law, and they have invariably provided the starting point for my own research. I am very grateful to have had the


Preface xv

chance to become, so to speak, a Kaser pupil of the second generation and to have been a student, later a junior colleague, of Professor Dr. Hans Hermann Seiler (Hamburg) and Professor Dr. Jens-Peter Meincke (Cologne) in their respective departments. Apart from that, I must confess that as a student Fritz Schulz' two books on Classical Roman Law and on the Principles of Roman Law made a particularly deep impression on me; they were written in a style which continues to attract me more than the balanced, detached and impersonal tone in which German scholarship usually presents itself. But then, I must also immediately say that my interest in Roman law has never been a purely antiquarian one; and the call to Cape Town provided me with an ideal opportunity of studying the history of the ius commune and the impact ot Roman law on modern legal systems. In that regard, I have drawn much inspiration from the work of Professors Feenstra and Coing.

In the second place, I should like to mention my colleagues and friends in Cape Town. Their hospitality and kindness have been a major source of strength and have largely contributed to these seven years spent on the slopes ot the Magic Mountain being so immensely rich and rewarding. 1 do not want to suggest for a minute that those years have always been easy. On the contrary: life as a law professor in a deeply polarized society, in which basic human rights and fundamental precepts of justice are infringed daily and almost as a matter of routine, is riddled with moral dilemmas. The teaching of law is demeaned if the idea of justice is flouted in practice; and not even a subject such as Roman law remains unaffected at a time when the traditional values upon which a university training is founded become caught up in a maelstrom ot partisanship and intolerance, of repression and opportunism, of violence and counterviolence. And yet, Cape Town still remains for me a very special place: "ille terrarum mihi praeter omn.es Angulus ridet." It is a smile that is both bewitchingly charming and distressingly sad.

Among the people I met in the Cape 1 have to mention one by name: Professor C.G. van der Merwe, my oldest South African friend and colleague at the University of Stellenbosch. From the time we first met, he and his family displayed a kind and generous hospitality towards me that one rarely, if ever, meets in Europe. It was he who encouraged me to accept the call to Cape Town in 1980 and who, some years later, also persuaded me to write the present book.

I should like to thank, furthermore, the University of Cape Town for providing me with a research grant and my colleagues at the University of Regensburg (as well as the Bavarian minister for science and culture) for granting me six months' sabbatical leaveonly one semester after I had taken up my new duties at Regensburgin order to complete this book. I gratefully acknowledge the help of Mrs Lisa Dummy who read the whole manuscript and suggested stylistic improvements and who also very kindly helped with the reading of the first set of proofs. The


xvi Preface

task of typing the manuscriptnot always an easy onewas largely carried out by my former secretary at UCT, Mrs Margaret Schubert. Five of my former Roman law students at UCT came to Regensburg for some months as research assistants and contributed in various ways to the completion of the book. Diane Davis, inter alia, double-checked all quotations from the various parts of the Corpus Juris Civilis and from the Institutes of Gaius, as well as all references to extra-legal sources and to the medieval jurists. Bruce Cleaver and Anton Fagan checked the references to Anglo-American and South African cases and helped with the list of abbreviations. Above all, however, they rendered me an invaluable assistance by feeding all corrections and amendments to the original text into a computer which, at times, displayed a rather inordinate appetite for all kinds of textual delicacies: it irretrievably devoured them. John Butler and Deon de Klerk spotted further mistakes when they checked the various indexes; they also helped with the reading of the proofs, particularly those of the preliminary and end matter. Back in Cape Town, John Linnegar most meticulously edited the final version of my manuscript before it went into print, liaised with the printers and cleared up all loose ends on the proofs. For his assistance, too, I am very grateful.

Last, but not least, I should like to thank Richard Cooke, Simon Sephton and Madeline Lass of Juta & Co. most sincerely for their wholehearted co-operation and unfailing support throughout the various stages of the production of this book.

REINHARD ZIMMERMANN Newlands, 10 October 1989

The favourable reception of this book has necessitated a second impression. I have taken the opportunity to eliminate a handful of printing mistakes. But the substance remains unchanged.

The book will now be published jointly by Juta & Co., . . Beck and Kluwer. I am most grateful to Richard Cooke in Cape Town and Dr. Wilhelm Warth in Munich for their ready co-operation.

REINHARD ZIMMERMANN Regensburg, September 1992


Summary of Contents Page

Preface............................................................................................. vii Table of Contents ........................................................................... xix List of Abbreviations ..................................................................... li Principal Works Cited ................................................................... lix

PART I INTRODUCTION THE CONCEPT OF AN OBLIGATION

AND ITS IMPLICATIONS Chapter

1 ObligatioConceptual and Systematic foundations ........ 1 2 Stipulatio alteri, Representation, Cession .......................... 34

PART II VERBAL OBLIGATIONS

3 Stipulatio............................................................................. 68 4 Stipulatio poenacConventional penalties ........................ 95 5 Suretyship ........................................................................... 114

PART III REAL OBLIGATIONS

6 MutuumLoan for Consumption .................................... 153 7 Commodaturn, Depositum, Pignus Loan for Use,

Deposit, Pledge.................................................................... 188

PART IV CONSENSUAL OBLIGATIONS

8 Emptio venditio I Sale (Basic Requirements).................. 230 9 Emptio venditio II Sale (Main Effects) ........................... 271

10 Emptio venditio III Sale (Warranty of Title and of Proper Quality) ................................................................... 293

11 Locatio conductio I Mainly Lease ................................... 338 12 Locatio conductio IIContract of Employment, Contract

for Work .............................................................................. 384 13 Mandatum Mandate ......................................................... 413

xvii


xviii Summary of Contents

Chapter . Page 14 Excursus; Negotiorum gestio .............................................. 433 15 SocictasPartnership ......................................................... 451

PART V ARRANGEMENTS OUTSIDE THE CONTRACTUAL

SCHEME OF CLASSICAL ROMAN LAW 16 Donatio ............................................................................... 477 17 Pacta and Innominate Real Contracts ................................ 508

PART VI GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY 18 Formation of Contract ........................................................ 546 19 ErrorMistake ................................................................... 583 20 Interpretation of Contracts ................................................. 621 21 Metus and Dolus Duress and Fraud................................. 651 22 Invalidity and Reasons for Invalidity.................................. 678 23 Condicio and Dies Conditions and Time Clauses .......... 716 24 Termination ot Obligations ................................................ 748 25 Breach of Contract .............................................................. 783

PART VII OBLIGATIONS ARISING NEITHER FROM CONTRACT

NOR FROM DELICT 26 Unjustified Enrichment ...................................................... 834

PART VIII THE LAW OF DELICTS

27 Delict in General ................................................................. 902 28 FurtumTheft .................................................................... 922 29 Lex Aquilia I........................................................................ 953 30 Lex Aquilia II ...................................................................... 998 31 Actio iniuriarumInfringements of Personality Rights 1050 32 Strict Liability...................................................................... 1095

Index of Main Sources (including Table of Cases) ....................... 1143 Subject Index .................................................................................. 1207


Table of Contents Page

Preface.......................................................................................... vii Summary of Contents ................................................................ xvii List of Abbreviations .................................................................. li Principal Works Cited................................................................. lix

CHAPTER 1 OBLIGATIO

I. The Concept and its Historical Development .............. 1 1. Obligareobligatio obligation................................ 1 2. Delictual liability: from revenge to compensation. . . . 1 3. The origin of contractual liability ............................... 4 4. Dare facere praestare oportere .................................... 6 5. Unenforceable obligations ("obligationes naturales") 7

II. Divisio Obligationum...................................................... 10 1. The contractdelict dichotomy ................................. 10 2. From twofold to tourtold subdivision......................... 14 3. Quasi-contractual and quasi-delictual obligations . . . . 15 4. The reception of Justinian's scheme............................ 18

(a) General observations ............................................ 18 (b) The distinction between delict and quasi-dehct. . 19 (cj The distinction between contract and quasi-

contract ................................................................. 20 5. The attitude adopted by the BGB .............................. 21 6. "De facto" contracts and implied promises ................ 22

III. The Place of Obligations within the System of Private Law ....................................................................... 24 1. Gains: personae, res, actiones ...................................... 25 2. Justinian's Itistitutioncs and the relation between actions

and obligations.............................................................. 26 3. From Justinian's scheme to the "Pandektensystew".. . . 29

IV. Plan of Treatment ............................................................ 32

CHAPTER 2 STIPULATIO ALTERI, REPRESENTATION, CESSION

I. Stipulatio Alteri ................................................................. 34 1. Alteri stipulari nemo potest ......................................... 34

(a) The rule ................................................................. 34 (b) The interest requirement ...................................... 35 (c) Origin ot the rule .................................................. 37

xix


xx Table of Contents

Page 2. Strategics to evade the restriction ................................... 38 3. Changes in post-classical law.......................................... 39 4. The evolution of the m odern contract in favour of a

third party .......................................................................... 41 (a) Alteri stipulari nemo potest: rule and exceptions 41 (b) The abandonm ent of the rule ................................. 42 (c) Privity of contract..................................................... 45

II. A gency ....................................................................................... 45 1. Direct representation: introduction................................. 45 2. No general concept of agency in Roman law ............... 47 3. Acting for (and through) others in Rom an law ............ 49

(a) Indirect representation and other substitute devices.......................................................................... 49

(b) The paterfam ilias acting through his dependants 51 (c) Procuratio................................................................... 53

4. The erosion of the rule against agency........................... 54 5. The evolution of the modern concept of agency ........... 56

III. Cession ........................................................................................ 58 1. Nom ina ossibus inhaerent ................................................ 58 2. The use of novation and procuratio in rem suam . . . . 60 3. Post-classical developments, Corpus Juris and ius

com mune............................................................................. 62 4. The turning of the tide ..................................................... 64

C HAPTER 3 STIPULATIO

1. The classical stipulation .................................................... 68 2. Evaluation of the oral form ality ...................................... 69 3. Relaxation of the word form alism ................................. 72

(a) The words to be used ............................................... 72 (b) Unitas actus ................................................................ 73 (c) Correspondence between question and answer .. 73

4. Excursus: utile per inutile vitiatur .......................... 75 (a) Partial invalidity in Rom an law .............................. 75 (b) Generalization of Ulp. D. 45, 1, 1, 5 .................... 76 (c) Severability ................................................................. 77

5. The atrophy of the classical stipulation .......................... 78 (a) T he use o f docum ents (w ith ev iden tiary func

tion) ............................................................................. 78 (b) Gradual conversion of the stipulation into a

written contract ......................................................... 80 6. The im portance of form and formality........................... 82

(a) Form as the oldest norm .......................................... 82 (b) From "effective" form to "protective" form ------ 84


Table of Contents xxi

Page (c) Formal requirements in modern contract law . . . 85 (d) Formalism or flexibility? .......................................... 87

7. The flex ibility of the Rom an stipulation : range of application ........................................................................... 89

8. The fram ing of the stipulation......................................... 91

(a) Abstract or causal? .................................................... 91 (b) The exceptio non num eratac pecuniac .................. 93

C H A PTER 4 STIPULA TIO POE NAE

1. The functions of penalty clauses ..................................... 95 (a) Assessment of damages ............................................ 95 (b) "In terrorem " function ............................................. 96 (c) Indirect enforcement of unenforceable acts ........... 97

2. Non-genuine conventional penalty clauses ................... 98 3. Genuine conventional penalty clauses ........................... 100 4. Range of application ......................................................... 103 5. Forfeiture of the penalty ................................................... 104

(a) If no tim e has been set for performance ............... 104 (h) "Si per debitorem stetit . . ." .................................. 105

6. The problem of excessive penalty clauses..................... 106 (a) The dangers of conventional penalties................... 106 (b) The approach of modern European legal system s 107 (c) lus comm une and South African law .................... 108

7. Semel comm issa poena non evanescit ........................... 110 (a) The Celsinian interpretation .................................... 110 (b) Praetorian intervention ............................................ 112

C HAPTER 5 SURETYSHIP

I. Introduction ............................................................................. 114 1. The contract of suretyship ............................................... 114 2. Real security and personal security ................................. 115

II. Sponsio, Fidepromissio and Fideiussio............................ 117 1. Sponsio ................................................................................ 117 2. The lim itations of sponsio ............................................... 118 3. Fidepromissio and the transition to fideiussio .............. 120

III. The Accessoriness of Suretyship in R om an Law .......... 121 1. Limited accessoriness of fideiussio .................................. 121

(a) ". . .nee plus in accessione [est]"........................... 121 (b) The availability of the debtor's exceptions ........... 123 (c) Invalidity of the principal obligation ....................... 124

2. Sponsio and fideprom issio ................................................ 125


xxii Table of (Contents

Page IV. Ide m De b itu m ....................................................................... 125

1. The classical principle of "Konsumptiouskonkurrefiz". . 125 2. From "Konsumptiotiskonkurrenz" to "Solutioiiskonkur-

retiz" .................................................................................... 126 3. Correality and solidarity .................................................. 128

V. The Triplet of Privileges available to the Fideiussor................................................................................. 129

1. Bencficium excussionis vel ordinis ................................ 129 2. Bcneficium divisionis ....................................................... 131 3. Beneficium cedendarum actionum .................................. 132

(a) T he prob lem ot the sure ty ' s r igh t of rec our se against the main debtor ............................................ 132

(b) The construction of the benefic ium cedendarum actionum ...................................................................... 134

(c) The recourse of the surety against his co-sureties 136

VI. Special Types of Suretyship Transactions ..................... 137 1. Promissio mdemnitatis and hdeiussio fideiussoris. . . . 137 2. The use of emptio venditio for the purpose ot

suretyship ............................................................................ 138 3. The use ot mandatum, especially the mandatum

quahficatum ........................................................................ 139

VII. The Impact of Fideiussio on M odern Legal Systems..................................................................................... 142 1. Roman-Dutch law ............................................................. 142 2. German law and the English comm on law .................. 144

VIII. W om en as Sureties ............................................................... 145 1. The senatus consultum Vellaeanum ................................ 145 2. The policy of the senatus consultum .............................. 146 3. The in terpreta tion of the se natus consul tum by the

Roman lawyers ................................................................... 148

(a) Protection of the woman ......................................... 148 (b) Protection of the creditor ......................................... 150 (c) Policy conflict............................................................. 150

4. Justinian's contribution ..................................................... 151 5. The position in m odern law ............................................. 152

C H A PTER 6 MUTUUM

I. The Roman Contract of Mutuum ................................... 153 1. The nature of m utuum ..................................................... 153 2. Mutuum and stipulatio ..................................................... 154


Table of Contents xxiii

Page 3. The consensual element of mutuum ............................... 156

(a) Consensus and rci interventio ................................. 156 (b) Ex meo tuum facere .................................................. 158 (c) Towards a loan by agreement ................................. 160 (d) Contractus mohatrae................................................. 161

4. On the "reality" of real contracts.................................... 163

II. The History of the Interest Rates and Usury .................. 166 1. Policies of the Roman Republic........................................ 166 2. M axim um rates from the end of the Republic unt il

Justinian ............................................................................... 168 3. The canonical prohibition on usury in the M iddle

Ages...................................................................................... 170 4. A clash between theory and practice? ............................. 172 5. Usura non est lucrum, scd merces ................................. 174 6. The flexible rule of the BGB ........................................... 175

III. Special Types of Loan ........................................................... 177 1. Loans to sons in power .................................................... 177

(a) The senatus consultum M acedonianum and its policy ........................................................................... 177

(b) The application of the senatus consultum by the Roman jurists ............................................................. 179

2. Loans to merchants involved in overseas trade............ 181 (a) Pecunia traiecticia as a form of marine insurance 181 (h) Greek custom and Roman practice ........................ 183

3. Loans to professional sportsmen ..................................... 186

C H A P T E R 7 C OM M O DA T U M , DE PO SIT U M , PIG N US

I. Com modatum ......................................................................... 188 1. Com modatum and m utuum ............................................ 188 2. History and gratuitous nature of commodatum ............ 189 3. Gratis habitare .................................................................... 191 4. The liability of the borrower ........................................... 192

(a) The diligentissimus paterfamilias............................ 192 (b) The nature of custodia liability ........................... 193 (c) The range of liability; instances of liability for vis

maior ........................................................................ 195 (d) The principle of utility.............................................. 198 (e) The actio furti of the borrower ............................... 200

5. The actio commodati contraria ....................................... 200 (a) Commodatum as imperfectly bilateral contract 200 (b) Reimbursement of expenses ..................................... 201 (c) Recovery of damages ................................................ 202

6. Loan for use today ............................................................ 203


xxiv Table of Contents

Page II. Depositum.......................................................................... 205

1. The nature of depositum; depositum miserabile ........ 205 2. The liability of the depositary...................................... 208

(a) Dolus, culpa lata (and exceptions)........................ 208 (b) Diligentia quam in suis......................................... 210 (c) The development of diligentia quam in suis ........ 211

3. The gratuitous nature of depositum ............................ 213 4. "Deposit" of immovables? .......................................... 214 5. The depositum irrcgulare ............................................. 215

(a) The problem of the deposit of money ................ 215 (b) Depositum and mutuum ...................................... 216 (c) From condictio to actio depositi .......................... 217

6. Conventional sequestration.......................................... 219

III. Pignus.................................................................................. 220 1. The nature of pignus ................................................... 220 2. The actio pigneraticia ................................................... 221

(a) The formula in factum concepta ........................... 221 (b) The formula in ius concepta ................................ 222

3. The consequences of non-redemption of the pledge 223 4. The liability of the pledgee.......................................... 225 5. The actio pigneraticia contraria ................................... 227

CHAPTER 8 EMPTIO VENDITIO I

I. The Binding Nature of Consensual Sale...................... 230 1. Consensus..................................................................... 230 2. The question of arrha .................................................. 230

(a) Arrha confirmatoria.............................................. 230 (b) Greek arrha ........................................................... 231 (c) Post-classical arrha ............................................... 232 (d) Argumcntum emptionis contractae or arrha

poenitentialis?........................................................ 233 3. The essentialia negotii .................................................. 234

II. The Possible Objects of a Contract of Sale................... 234 1. Demarcating the areas of emptio venditio and locatio

conductio ...................................................................... 234 2. Generic sales ................................................................. 236

(a) The Roman rule and its origin ............................ 236 (b) Generic sale and sale of specific goods ................ 238 (c) The double function of the contract of sale ........ 239

3. The sale of non-existing objects.................................. 240


Table of Contents xxv

Page 4. The sale of res extra commerciurn or of a free m an. . 241

(a) Res publicae, res divini iuris and the liber homo 241 (b) The availability of the actio empti .......................... 241 (c) Culpa in contrahendo ................................................ 244

5. Ernptio rei speratae and ernptio spei .............................. 245 (a) Emptio rei speratae .................................................... 245 (b) Emptio spei and its viability .................................... 246 (c) ". . . quasi a lca em itur" .......................................... 248

III. The P urchase P rice................................................................. 250 1. Did the purchase price have to consist in money? . . . 250

(a) The Sabinian view ..................................................... 250 (b) The Proculian view ................................................... 251 (c) Sale and exchange ...................................................... 251

2. Pretium verum ................................................................... 252 3. Pretium certum .................................................................. 253

(a) Borderline cases ......................................................... 253 (b) Determ ination of the price at a later stage............ 254

4. Pretium iustum .................................................................. 255 (a) The Rom an attitude .................................................. 255 (b) Invicem se circumscribere ........................................ 256 (c) Private autonomy ...................................................... 258

5. Laesio enorm is and equality in exchange....................... 259 (a) C. 4, 44, 2 ................................................................... 259 (b) E xtension of 4 , 44 , 2 ........................................... 262 (c) Consequential problem s........................................... 263 (d) The problem of establishing the iustum pretium 264 (e) The abolition of laesio enorm is ............................... 267 (f) Equality in exchange today ..................................... 268

C HA PTER 9 EM PTIO VENDITIO II

I. The P assing of O w nership .................................................. 271 1. The relationship between contract of sale and transfer

of ownership....................................................................... 271 2. The paym ent of the purchase price ................................ 272

(a) hist. I I , 1, 41 ............................................................... 272 (b) Pre-classical, classical and post-classical law.......... 274 (c) Pactum reservati dominii ......................................... 276

II. The D uties of the P arties ...................................................... 277 1. The duties of the purchaser ............................................. 277


xxvi Table of Contents

Page 2 . The duties of the vendor.................................................. 278

(a) Uti frui habere possidereque licerc ......................... 278 (b) Transfer of ownership?............................................. 278 (c) Practical implications................................................. 279 (d) The liability of the vendor ....................................... 280

III. The P assing of the R isk ........................................................ 281 1. Periculum est emptoris ..................................................... 281 2. The position in classical law ............................................ 282 3. The am bit of the rule ....................................................... 283 4. Excursus: the sale of wine................................................ 284 5. The concept of periculum ................................................ 287 6. Afr. D. 19, 2, 33 et al.: evidence against periculum

emptoris? ............................................................................. 288 7. Evaluation of the Rom an risk rule ................................. 290 8. Reception and rejection of periculum est emptoris .. . 291

C HAPTER 10 EM PTIO VENDITIO III

I. Liability for Eviction ............................................................. 293 1. W arranty of peaceable possession .................................. 293 2. Liability under the actio auctontatis ............................... 294 3. Liability under a stipulatio duplae................................... 295 4. Liability under the actio empti ........................................ 296

(a) "Emptorem duplam promitti a venditore oportet" ....................................................................... 296

(b) Liability for the "positive interest" ........................ 298

5. The position under Justinian............................................ 300 6. The determ ination of quod interest ............................... 301 7. Rom an-Dutch and modern Germ an law ...................... 302

II. L iability for Latent D efects ................................................ 305 1. Introduction........................................................................ 305

(a) The remedies: Roman tradition and natural law. 305 (b) The implied conditions of the Sale of Goods Act 306 (c) Caveat em ptor ........................................................... 307

2. Early remedies.................................................................... 308 3. Liability for dolus and dicta in venditione .................... 308 4. Liability arising from specific prom issa ......................... 310 5. The aedilitian rem edies ..................................................... 311

(a) The sale of slaves....................................................... 311 (h) Morbus and vitiurn ................................................... 311 (c) Defects of character .................................................. 314 (d) Dicta promissave ....................................................... 315 (c) "Redhibendi ludicium " ............................................ 316


Table of Contents xxvii

Page (f) The actio rcdhibitoria ............................................... 317 (g) The actio quanti minoris; the sa le "sub corona" 318 (h) The sale of iumenta ................................................... 318

6. Extended liability under the actio empti........................ 319 (a) Pom p. D. 19, 1, 6, 4 and other texts .................... 320 (b) Reception of the aedilitian principles into the ius

civile............................................................................. 321 (c) The position under Justinian ................................... 322

7. Actio empti and aedilitian remedies in the ius comm une ............................................................................ 322 (a) "M iretur vero a liquis, cur Aediles introduxerunt actiones." ............................................................................. 322 (b) Merging the remedies............................................... 323 (c) The scope of application of the actio redhibitoria 325 (d) Excursus: Special rules relating to the sale of

cattle ............................................................................ 326 (c) Modern German law ................................................ 327 (f) The system of remedies in Roman-Dutch law . . 328 (g) Phamc v. Paizes ......................................................... 329

8. Mortuus redhibetur ........................................................... 330 (a) The problem of the im possibility of restoration 330 (b) The f ic tion of "m or tuus re dh ibetur" a nd prob

lems arising therefrom.............................................. 331 9. Once again: "S i vas" (Pom p. D. 19, 1, 6, 4) .............. 334

(a) The development of the "Pothicr" rule ................ 334 (b) The English Sale of Goods Act ............................... 336

C H A PT E R 11 LOCATIO CON DUCTIO I

I. Locatio Conductio in General ............................................ 338 1. Locare and conducere ....................................................... 338 2. Three in one ....................................................................... 339 3. Historical development..................................................... 340

II. The Social and Economic Framework of Lease ........... 342 1. The quest for security of tenure ..................................... 342 2. Living conditions in Rome .............................................. 344 3. Some typical problems..................................................... 347 4. The Roman lawyers and the law of lease ...................... 348 5. Legal rules and extra-legal restrictions .......................... 350

III. Locatio Conductio Re i ......................................................... 351 1. The nature of lease ............................................................ 351 2. The objects of lease ........................................................... 351


xxviii Table of Contents

Page 3. Merces locationis.......................................................... 353

(a) Merces vera et certa.............................................. 353 (b) Pecunia numerata? ................................................ 354

4. Leases for a fixed term................................................. 355 (a) Lustrum; ius repellendi and ius migrandi ............ 355 (b) Relocatio tacita...................................................... 356

5. Leases for an indefinite period..................................... 357 6. Leases in perpetuity ..................................................... 358 7. The duties of the locator ............................................. 360 8. The range of the lessor's liability ................................ 360

(a) Prevention of frui licere........................................ 360 (b) Choosing unsuitable slaves ................................... 361 (c) Defect of title........................................................ 362 (d) Publicatio .............................................................. 363 (e) Leaky vats and toxic plants.................................. 365 (f) From Ulp. D. 19, 2, 19, 1 to 583 BGB ............ 367

9. The problem of risk..................................................... 369 (a) Periculum locatoris............................................... 369 (b) Remissio mercedis ................................................ 371

10. The duties of the conductor ........................................ 374 (a) Payment of rent, cultivation; the standard of care 374 (b) Vicarious liability? ................................................ 376

11. The position of the lessee ............................................ 377 (a) His protection against the lessor .......................... 377 (b) Alienation of the leased property by the lessor.. 378 (c) Emptio tollit locatum........................................... 379 (d) D. 43, 16, 12 in fine............................................. 380 (e) Huur gaat voor koop ........................................... 381

12. Towards security of tenure ......................................... 382

CHAPTER 12 LOCATIO CONDUCTIO 11 I. Locatio Conductio Operarum ........................................ 384

1. Essential elements of Roman "labour law"................. 384 (a) Locare conducere.................................................. 384 (b) Esscntialia negotii; periculum conductors .......... 384 (c) Imperitia culpae adnumeratur .............................. 386

2. The range of application of locatio conductio oper arum ............................................................................ 387 (a) Status relationships............................................... 387 (b) Trie artes liberales................................................. 388 (c) The value of "labour" in Roman society ........... 389 (d) Common law (ius civile) and employment rela

tionships ............................................................... 391 (e) The contribution of Roman law .......................... 392


Table of Contents xxix

Page II. Locatio Conductio Operis ................................................... 393

1. Essential characteristics and range of application.......... 393 2. Problems of classification ................................................. 394 3. Range of liability of the conductor ................................ 397

(a) Impcntia and custodia .............................................. 397 (h) Gai. D. 19, 2, 25, 7 and the problem of vicarious

liability ........................................................................ 399 4. The problem of risk allocation ........................................ 401

(a) Periculum conductoris.............................................. 401 (b) Equitable distribution of the risks.......................... 402

5. Adprobatio operis ............................................................ 404 6. Lex Rhodia de iactu .......................................................... 406

(a) The reception of the lex Rhodia into Roman law 406 (b) Subsequent history of the lex Rhodia .................... 409

CH A PTER 13 M ANDATUM

1. The essential characteristics of mandatum ..................... 413 2. The gratuitousness of mandatum ................................... 415

(a) Officium et amicitia.................................................. 415 (b) Pay merit of an honorarium ..................................... 415 (c) 4, 35, 1 .................................................................. 416 (d) Receipt of a salarium ................................................ 416 (e) Mandatum nisi gra tuitum nullum: the ius com

mune ........................................................................... 418 3. The range of application of mandatum ........................... 420

(a) Factual and contractual activities of the mandatarius............................................................................. 420

(b) Illegal and immoral mandates; the mandatum tua tantum gratia .............................................................. 421

(c) Types of mandate according to the interest involved ....................................................................... 422

4. Mandatum m orte solvitur ................................................ 424 5. The liability of the mandatarius ....................................... 426

(a) Dolus or dolus and culpa?........................................ 426 (b) Terminological problems ......................................... 427 (c) Altruistic and not so altruistic mandatarii ............. 427 (d) Mandatum: between suretyship and procuratio . 428 (e) Spondet diligentiam et m dustr iam negotio ger-

endo parem ................................................................. 429 6. The liability of the mandator ........................................... 430

(a) Utility considerations ................................................ 430 (b) Casus a nullo praestantur ......................................... 430 (c) The ius comm une ...................................................... 431


xxx Table of Contents

Page C HA PTER 14 NEG OTIORUM GESTIO

1. Negotiorum gestio and m andatum ............................... 433 (a) Similarities.................................................................. 433 (b) Difference................................................................... 433

2. The value basis of negotiorum gestio ........................... 435 3. The history of negotiorum gestio in Roman law . . . . 436 4. The range of application of negotiorum gestio ........... 438 5. Requirements of the actio negotiorum gestorum . . . . 440

(a) 'Taking care" of a "negotium " "for another" . . 440 (b) Animus negotia aliena gerendi? .............................. 441 (c) Utilitas gestionis ........................................................ 442

6. The actio negotiorum gestorum contraria.................... 443 (a) Its importance today ................................................. 443 (h) Remuneration of services rendered? ...................... 444

7. The standard of liability of the gestor............................ 445 (a) The position ot the gestor ....................................... 445 (b) Pom p. D. 3, 5, 10 and Ulp . D. 3, 5, 3, 9 ............ 446

8. Negotiorum gestio in m odern law ................................. 447 (a) Evaluation of negotiorum gestio in German law 447 (b) The individualistic approach of the common law 448 (c) Rescue cases ............................................................... 449

C HAPTER 15 SOCIETAS

I. R om an Law ............................................................................. 451 1. The nature of societas ...................................................... 451 2. Evolution of the contract of societas ............................. 451

(a) Erctum non citum .................................................... 451 (b) Pre-classical consortium and classical societas ... 452

3. Basic features of classical societas ................................... 454 4. Term ination of the societas ............................................. 455

(a) Renuntiatio, mors socii, insolvency....................... 455 (b) The bringing of an actio pro socio ........................ 457

5. Freedom of contract and its lim itation.......................... 457 (a) The allocation of shares in profits and losses. . . . 457 (b) The societas leonina .................................................. 459

6. The actio pro socio ........................................................... 460 7. Liability between the partners ........................................ 461

(a) The problem of contribution .................................. 461 (b) Dolus liability ............................................................ 462 (c) Extension: culpa lata, diligentia quam in suis,

culpa ............................................................................ 462 (d) Custodia and imperitia ............................................. 464

8. Creation and partition of joint ownership .................... 465


Table of Contents xxxi

Page II. Justin ian, Ius C om m une and M odern

D eve lop m ents .......................................................................... 466 1. Liability between socii ...................................................... 466 2. The societas and third parties .......................................... 467

(a) Socii venaliciani, actiones adiecticiac qualitatis and societates publicanorum ................................... 467

(b) Societas and agency ................................................... 468 3. The actio pro socio............................................................ 470 4. The "com m unity of collective hand"............................ 471 5. South African law of partnership ................................... 472

(a) Sources ........................................................................ 472 (b) General features ......................................................... 474

C HA PTER 16 DONATIO

1. Introduction ........................................................................ 477 (a) Prom ises of gifts and executed gifts...................... 477 (b) R easons fo r po lic ing the transfer o f g ra tu itous

benefits ........................................................................ 477 (c) Conceptual problems ................................................ 478

2. The concept of donation in classical Roman law ......... 479 (a) Donatio and the contractual schem e ..................... 479 (b) The executed gift ...................................................... 480 (c) The prevailing attitude towards donations .......... 481

3. The lex C incia de m uneribus .......................................... 482 (a) Purpose and background of the enactm ent ........... 482 (b) The application of the lex C incia ........................... 483

4. The prohibition of donationes inter virum et uxorem 484 (a) Origin and purpose of the prohibition .................. 484 (b) Purity of m arriage .................................................... 487 (c) The application of the prohibition .......................... 488

5. The law of donation under Constantmc......................... 490 (a) Prom otion of acts of generosity ............................ 490 (b) Formalities.................................................................. 492 (c) Donations and dispositions m ortis causa ............... 493

6. Justinian and the law of donations.................................. 494 (a) Donation as a binding contract .............................. 494 (b) Enter the cheerful giver ........................................... 496 (c) Revocation of donations ........................................... 497

7. Donation under the ius commune and in modern law 498 (a) The concept of donation; insinuatio actis ............. 498 (b) Restrictive policies in France ................................... 500 (c) Germ an law: form and definition of donation. .. 501 (d) Absence of agrced-upon recompense ..................... 503 (e) English law: the doctrine o{ consideration ........... 504


xxxii Table of Contents

Page C HA PTER 17 PACTA AND INNOM INATE RE AL

C O N T R A C T S

I. Pacta in G eneral ..................................................................... 508 1. Nuda pactio obligationem non parit ............................. 508 2. Pacta ex continent! adiecta ............................................... 509

II. Pacta Praetoria ........................................................................ 511 1. Constitutum debiti............................................................ 511

(a) The actio de pecunia constituta .............................. 511 (b) Constitutum debiti alieni ........................................ 512 (c) Constitutum debiti proprii ...................................... 512

2. Receptum arbitri................................................................ 513 3. Receptum argentarii .......................................................... 514 4. Receptum nautarum cauponum stabulariorum ............. 514

(a) Actio dc rcccpto; custodia liability ......................... 514 (b) The reasons for the actio de recepto ..................... 515 (c) Actio de recepto and special delictual actions ----- 517 (d) Actio de recepto and actio locati............................ 517 (e) From accidentale to naturale negotii ..................... 519 (f) The receptum in m odern law ................................. 520 (g) Range of application ................................................. 521 (h) The liability of common carriers ........................... 523 (i) Range of liability under the ius comm une ........... 524

III. P acta Legitim a: C om promissum as Example ............... 526 1. Classical and post-classical compromissum .................. 526 2. The comprom issum of the ius comm une...................... 528 3. Arbiter, arbitrator and am icabilis com positor .............. 528

IV. C ombined Transactions: H ire-purchase in R oman Law ............................................................................................. 530

V. Innom inate R eal C ontracts ................................................. 532 1. Permutatio and the rise of actiones praescriptis verbis 532 2. Range of transactions ....................................................... 534 3. Aestimatum ........................................................................ 535 4. Innom inate contracts and the contractual scheme------ 536

VI. Tow ards a General Law of C ontract Based on Consent ...................................................................................... 537

1. Contract and pacta in the Corpus Juris C ivilis............. 537 2. Pacta vestita and pacta nuda ........................................... 538 3. The contribution of (commercial) practice.................... 540 4. The contribution of the canon lawyers ......................... 542 5. The position of the natural lawyers; sum mary ............ 544


Table of Contents xxxiii

CHAPTER 18 FORMATION OF CONTRACT I. The Roman Contract of Stipulation under the Ius

Commune ........................................................................... S46 1. From contract vcrbis to contract littcris ...................... 546 2. Ex nudo pacto oritur actio and the form of stipulation 547

II. The Doctrine of Causa ..................................................... 549 1. Ex nudo pacto oritur actio and the notion of causa . . 549 2. Causa in Roman law .................................................... 549 3. The scholastic doctrine of causation............................. 551 4. Causa as an extra piece of "garment" ......................... 551 5. The decline of causa ..................................................... 553 6. Causa and consideration in English law...................... 554 7. Causa and consideration in South African law ........... 556

(a) The reception of the consideration doctrine ........ 556 (b) Iusta causa and Grotius' notion of "redcheke

oorzaecke" ............................................................. 557 III. Consensus ........................................................................... 559

1. Consent as the basis of contract in modern law ......... 559 2. The Roman contribution ............................................. 561

(a) Conceptual analysis in general ............................ 561 (b) Contractus ............................................................. 562 (c) Pacta ...................................................................... 562 (d) Conventio.............................................................. 563 (e) Consensus.............................................................. 563

3. Conventio, pactum and contractus under the ius commune ...................................................................... 565

4. Domat and Pothier ....................................................... 566 5. Grotius, Pufendorf and Wolff ..................................... 567 6. Formation of contract in English law.......................... 569

(a) England and continental legal science .................. 569 (b) The analysis of contract ........................................ 571

7. Contract and polhcitatio............................................... 572 (a) From promise to contract .................................... 572 (b) The smoke ball case.............................................. 573 (c) "Aushbung" and pollicitatio ................................. 573 (d) Pollicitatio and contractual liability ..................... 575

IV. Pacta Sunt Servanda ......................................................... 576 1. Pacta sunt servanda and classical contract doctrine... 576 2. The right of unilateral withdrawal from a contract .. 578 3. Clausula rebus sic stantibus.......................................... 579

(a) Origin and development of the clausula ............. 579 (b) The clausula from the 17th century to today ___ 581


xxxiv Table of Contents

Page CHAPTER 19 ERROR

1. Error and contractual theory ........................................... 583 (a) Cotton ex Peerless ...................................................... 583 (b) Discrepancy between intention and declaration.. 584 (c) Private autonomy and protection of expectations

engendered .................................................................. 584 (d) Will theory and declaration theory ........................ 585

2. Basic types of error in Roman law ................................. 587 (a) Vcrba and voluntas ................................................... 587 (b) Determination of the object of performance . . . . 588 (c) Ulp. D. 18, 1, 9 pr . and error in corpore ............. 589 (d) Error in pretio............................................................ 590 (e) Error in negotio ......................................................... 591 (f) Error in persona ........................................................ 592

3. The problem of error in substantia ............................... 592 (a) Ulp. D. 18, 1, 9, 2 .................................................... 592 (b) Error relating to quality ........................................... 593 (c) Drawing the line: vinegar sold as wine ................. 594 (d) Further borderline cases ........................................... 595

4. Com mon mistake .............................................................. 596 5. Error in motive and error in nomine.............................. 597 6. Com mon error in nom ine ................................................ 598 7. Will-orientation, mistake and the formal transactions 598

(a) Testaments.................................................................. 598 (b) Stipulations ................................................................. 599

8. Error and the protection of the promisee ...................... 600 (a) Modern approaches: English law and German law 600 (b) The position in Roman law .................................... 602

9. Iuris ignorantia nocet, facti ignorantia non nocet . . . . 604 (a) Error iuris nocet: the position in Roman law . .. 604 (b) Error vincibilis and invincibilis (ius commune). . 606 (c) Error iuris (ius commune and modern law) .......... 608

10. The development of the modern error doctrine .......... 609 (a) Usus m odernus pandectarum .................................. 609 (b) Error in persona ........................................................ 611 (c) The contribution of the natural lawyers ............... 612 (d) Error in Savigny's System and under the BGB . . 614 (e) Error in substantia .................................................... 616 (f) Developments in French and English law.............. 618

C H A P TE R 20 INTERPRET ATIO N OF CONTR ACTS

I. French Francs and Belgian Francs (Introduction) . . . . 621 II. R om an L aw ............................................................................. 622


Table of Contents xxxv

Page 1. From verba to voluntas ............................................... 622

(a) Pre-classical Roman law....................................... 622 (b) Post-classical jurisprudence .................................. 624 (c) "Voluntas in primis spectanda cst" ..................... 625

2. The position in classical Roman law........................... 625 (a) Verba or voluntas? ............................................... 625 (b) Flexibility .............................................................. 626 (c) The causa Curiana: the case before the court. . .. 628 (A) The causa Curiana: jurists and orators ................ 630

(e) The "individualizing" approach .......................... 632 (f) Id quod actum est................................................. 633 (g) Excursus: the animus novandi.............................. 634

III. Post-reception Developments ........................................ 635 1. The older ius commune .............................................. 635 2. True intention and justifiable reliance......................... 636 3. Rules of interpretation: in general ............................... 637 4. Rules of interpretation: the contra proferentcm rule . 639

(a) Interpretatio contra eum qui clarius loqui debuisset ............................................................... 639

(b) The contra proferentem rule in medieval and in modern law........................................................... 640

IV. Special Problem Situations ............................................. 643 1. 116, 117, 118, 122 BGB ...................................... 643 2. Lack of seriousness ...................................................... 644 3. Reservatio mentalis....................................................... 644

(a) Roman law ........................................................... 644 (b) Pandectists and canon lawyers ............................ 644

4. Simulatio ...................................................

the law of obligations - roman foundations of the civilian tradition

Documents